T1B

Sorry, we're all busy watching big boy football.

Georgia lost to a non AQ team at home
ole Miss did too
Auburn needed a miracle to beat a Sun Belt team at home
Miss St struggled with Memphis at home
Kentucky played a game vs a junior college at home

Rack Toejam for getting over on you inbred fuckstains.

A Mike Stoops team sucks? Man, who woulda thunk it?


The inaugural year of the PAC12 is not so good.

Haven't really checked out Utah yet, but other than them, the South sucks. CU blows choad.

The North has 2 strong teams, a possible mediocre in Kal, and Oregon State lost to a 1AA at home...

UDub sucks, Wazzu probably sucks... did I mention Oregon State duked it against a 1AA?

Bad year in the PAC -- Oregon rolls to the Rose Bowl.

Okie Lite's O is not surprisingly just nasty again. I think zona as a program has leveled-off. Could find themselves lost in the shuffle if the PAC16 deal were to go through.

Dinsdale wrote:Bad year in the PAC -- Oregon rolls to the Rose Bowl.

Yep...and I sure hope not. When it comes to representing the conference on the biggest stages, it's ABO (Anyone But Oregon) for me. It's not just that they lose; it's the way they keep embarrasing themselves. Whether it's their ghetto clown unis, LaGarrett Blount, lame rap videos, Phil Knight, soft D's, gimmicky O's that always vanish when the other team has time to prepare for them (despite the fact that Oregon also has a month to prepare for their opponent), the fact that they're the Ducks...nah, I'll pass.

Oregon hasn't been to a Rose Bowl since 1958, and they haven't won one since WWI, so...go Stanford! Unless we're talking about UO's cheerleaders, please keep Oregon off the national stage.

So now we're back to talking about adding four Big XII teams to the Pac, including the possibility of OU and Texas? Assuming USC eventually returns to prominence, yep, that would make for quite a decent conference.

Van wrote:Oregon hasn't been to a Rose Bowl since 1958,

That's odd... I thought they got their ass-kicked a couple of years ago by Ohio State in the Rose Bowl.

penn state played their blue/white spring game in the 95 rose bowl.

Road teams never win on Thursdays, why anyone would agree to play in one is beyond me.

Zona hasn't been the same since 1999, how Stoops still has a job is proof that they dont care about righting that ship, they should have never fired Tomey


Most of the Pac suffers from perpetual little brother syndrome, they play their best game vs USC each year and play like pussies in every other game. None of them have any identity of their own.

M2 wrote:

Van wrote:Oregon hasn't been to a Rose Bowl since 1958,

That's odd... I thought they got their ass-kicked a couple of years ago by Ohio State in the Rose Bowl.

:doh:

Not only that, but they also played in the 1995 Rose Bowl, losing to Penn State.

That'll teach me not to skim the page so quickly. My bad.

SoCalTrjn wrote:Miss St struggled with Memphis at home

If by "struggled with Memphis at home" you mean they blew Memphis out @ Memphis, then you're spot on.

M Club wrote:penn state played their blue/white spring game in the 95 rose bowl.

RACK. Kerry Collins was only 28 years old in that game.

SoCalTrjn wrote:Georgia lost to a non AQ team at home
ole Miss did too
Auburn needed a miracle to beat a Sun Belt team at home
Miss St struggled with Memphis at home
Kentucky played a game vs a junior college at home

UCLA lost to a non AQ team
Oregon State lost to a 1AA
USC needed a late 4th quarter stop at home to beat the worst team in the Big10
Oregon was ran off the field by the SEC team they played
Stanford,
Washington had to hold on to beat a 1AA team

You were saying?

that's kind of the funny thing about the Pac right now. here in Boulder, i've listened to CU fan for a year tell me how the Pac is stronger than the old Big XII...."top to bottom". i don't see that at all. competitive balance can also mean mediocre.

the argument is larded with favoritism for the new conf digs so i get that but...a KU team that won the Orange Bowl "sucks" while a 7 win Oregon State team "does more with less"...and that's a step up? or a Tech team that beat BCS crying Cal in the Holiday Bowl is a "flash in the pan with the Pirate" while Stanford under Harbaugh is Joe Pa at Penn State condensed from forever into a 2 year run that means Stanford is the new perennial power. at some point that just doesn't make sense.

riddle me this, CFB honks - how is a ranked team (Mizzou, 21st) a 7-1/2 point dog at unranked ASU tonight?

I know our QB might be the suck, but still, give me the Tigers and the points.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

SoCalTrjn wrote:Miss St struggled with Memphis at home

If by "struggled with Memphis at home" you mean they blew Memphis out @ Memphis, then you're spot on.

S'what I was thinking too.

. 1 2 3 4 T
MSST 17 14 14 14 59
MEM 0 7 0 7 14

War Wagon wrote:riddle me this, CFB honks - how is a ranked team (Mizzou, 21st) a 7-1/2 point dog at unranked ASU tonight?

I know our QB might be the suck, but still, give me the Tigers and the points.

ASU's record last season was a little misleading. They lost a lot of close games. Their defense stands to be one of, if not the best in the PAC12. That isn't saying much considering the conference, but ASU's defense would give some of the high powered offenses in the BigIX fits.

This game will propel the Devils to a top 25 ranking and the crowd is going to be heard in Sun Devil Stadium. I think they cover.

Go Coogs' wrote: ASU's record last season was a little misleading. They lost a lot of close games. Their defense stands to be one of, if not the best in the PAC12. That isn't saying much considering the conference, but ASU's defense would give some of the high powered offenses in the BigIX fits.

This game will propel the Devils to a top 25 ranking and the crowd is going to be heard in Sun Devil Stadium. I think they cover.

Mizzou's defense ain't too bad either. I look for a low scoring game.

i thought ASU lost some of their stud db's in the off-season?

right now, home field OOC means a lot more than ranking.

King Crimson wrote:i thought ASU lost some of their stud db's in the off-season?

That won't matter when you have this guy in the backfield all day long.

Go Coogs' wrote: ASU's record last season was a little misleading. They lost a lot of close games.

Rumps, I'll give you a little more info on the PAC 12 and how things work out here.

Cal beat Arizona State last year 50-17 and Cal had the worst offense I've ever seen in school history last year.

Stay away from what the talking heads say about a lot of what will happen in the PAC this year.

Go Coogs' wrote: Their defense stands to be one of, if not the best in the PAC12.

Cal had the best D in the PAC last year.... and that was with an offense that a majority of the time went 3 and out.

Last year was the first year under a new DC (General Pendergast) and they were just implementing a new system that could utilize Cal's talent... which no one will dispute has always been there.

Cal's #1 PAC 10 D last year... is much more talented and experienced this year and is very scary.

Example: Late last year... Cal held Oregon to 7 offensive points and 15 total points... no team in the country has been even close to doing that.

Early this year... LSU held Oregon to 27 offensive points and gave up more yards in offense than Cal did last year... and Cal's offense went 3 and out more than not last year.

Cal's D this year is a bigger, faster, and stronger version of LSU's D this year and we finally have an offense this season.

Go Coogs' wrote:That isn't saying much considering the conference,

Consider the example I gave above between Cal and LSU when each played Oregon.

And thanks for slapping 'Sham Wows' team around last week... they're the worst fan base in the PAC.

King Crimson wrote:i thought ASU lost some of their stud db's in the off-season?

They did... which was an average D at best last year.

M2 wrote:

Go Coogs' wrote:That isn't saying much considering the conference,

Consider the example I gave above between Cal and LSU when each played Oregon.

Are you trying to say that the Pac 12 is good because LSU gave up more points to Oregon than Cal did? Even the most ardent Transitive Property Ballsucking Homer can't be this devoid of rational thought.

people think so highly of Cal, many are picking them to lose to Colorado tomorrow.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
Are you trying to say that the Pac 12 is good because LSU gave up more points to Oregon than Cal did? Even the most ardent Transitive Property Ballsucking Homer can't be this devoid of rational thought.

Psst... reading comprehension my friend.

I was talking about Cal's defense this year... not the how good the PAC will be this year.

Keep up.

King Crimson wrote:people think so highly of Cal, many are picking them to lose to Colorado tomorrow.

Is that what Vegas says.... or the talking heads ?

Enjoy the clown stomping tomorrow in Boulder.... you are in Boulder right ?

M2 wrote:Cal's D this year is a bigger, faster, and stronger version of LSU's D this year and we finally have an offense this season.

Great. So, reaching for the stars this season...maybe 8-4, and that whole 'no Rose Bowls in our lifetime' thing remains intact.

It's still just Cal, after all.

Whitey, to answer your question -- while much less discussed than thursday nighters, friday nighters are about the same dealio... when there's an OOC matchup up on weeknight, the home team covers pretty close to 100% of the time (I forget the exact number, but I believe it's well into the 90%+ range over the last decade), and wins outright almost as often, even if there's a percieved mismatch between the teams.

Just the way CFB works, I guess.

ASU does return quite a few guys on offense, I believe. And have a couple of gamers on D.

King Crimson wrote:people think so highly of Cal, many are picking them to lose to Colorado tomorrow.

The last line I saw said Cal's a 7 point favorite.

I'm enjoying this little trap Dins keeps setting recently, whereby he attempts to snare us in his deceitful web through the intentional fucking up of that whole 'i before e except after c' dealio.

The ol' self-deprecating "Let's see who's paying attention?" gambit...very clever indeed.

I won't dispute the message based on the messenger, as easy as it would be...

Kal returns a bunch to a nasty, nasty D. Jury is still out on the offense.

But I don't know if I'd go so far as to compare them to the lightning-fast LSU unit.

And no, the Transitive Theory against their common opponent doesn't work, either.

Sudden Sam wrote:I read somewhere that Cal returned 5 starters.

One on the D-line.

All of my post should be assumed to be qualified with "but I may be wrong."

Does Cal and their amazing D have any available dates for a roadie? If so...in!! - Maryland

Sudden Sam wrote:I read somewhere that Cal returned 5 starters.

One on the D-line.

You'd be wrong... but, it's not the first time.

Sudden Sam wrote:

M2 wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:I read somewhere that Cal returned 5 starters.

One on the D-line.

You'd be wrong... but, it's not the first time.

Okay, so how many STARTERS returned on the defense?

Eight... and Cal rotates about 20 all game long.


Oh yeah, and 'Tiny' should be seeing a lot of playing time this year.

360 lbs. 6 foot 2 and bench presses... 500 lbs. a new school record and a true freshman.

Dinsdale wrote:Whitey, to answer your question -- while much less discussed than thursday nighters, friday nighters are about the same dealio... when there's an OOC matchup up on weeknight, the home team covers pretty close to 100% of the time (I forget the exact number, but I believe it's well into the 90%+ range over the last decade), and wins outright almost as often, even if there's a percieved mismatch between the teams.

Just the way CFB works, I guess.

ASU does return quite a few guys on offense, I believe. And have a couple of gamers on D.

Maybe I need to give Bud Light another try, 'cuz I sure can't see this game the way Wags does. I've hated this match-up from the first time I saw it on the schedule.

Bad things happen to the Tigers at night in the desert.



Bad things, man.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Van wrote: So now we're back to talking about adding four Big XII teams to the Pac, including the possibility of OU and Texas? Assuming USC eventually returns to prominence, yep, that would make for quite a decent conference.

Yep. USC (in about 6-8 years after recovering from their 30 scholarships loss), Oklahoma, Texas, and maybe Oregon from time to time will make a great conference.

Oregon is a step in school, they only seem to do anything after other schools start to struggle or get hit by the NCAA. They still seem to NEVER do well in big games where USC isn't the opponent, easily the last school the Pac ever wants to represent the conference in big games OOC

Sudden Sam wrote:

M2 wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote: Okay, so how many STARTERS returned on the defense?

Eight.

8, huh? You sure about that?

Yep.


It seems like bama wanted 'Tiny' pretty bad... but, o well.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/4088 ... or-alabama

Jesus, these dudes make Left Seater look like Mary Lou Retton.

Moala is like another Mesean, tailored to play for USC, direct ties to the school only to turn his back on Troy at the last minute to go to Kal and then never beating the Trojans